If NASA faked the moon landings, does the agency have any credibility at all? Was the Space Shuttle program also a hoax? Is the International Space Station another one? Do not dismiss these hypotheses offhand. Check out our wider NASA research and make up your own mind about it all.

Oh, and well done, NASA ! LOVE your awesome first images of planet MARS - well worth a few billion $ !

We'll see if William Coopers prediction comes true concerning the fairy tale he said they will tell us about the history of Mars. There will be no manned mission to Mars for another thirty years so I'm posting this now. Here is part of what he said in the quote below.

What they are going to tell you is that mars was populated by an ancient race, who destroyed their planet in warfare and had to live underground because of the consequences of the terrible calamities that they visited upon themselves. At some point in our ancient history they came to this earth and populated it with the survivors of that cataclysm, bred with early man and the human race was the result of that mixture.....Sounds far fetched doesn't it? Well, you jut keep your eyes and ears open ladies and gentlemen because that is the thrust of all that you are going to hear regarding extraterrestrial life, outer space.

Based on what they tell us they supposedly know about Mars, it does seem like they have been building up the excuses so that they can give us this fairy tale, that Mars was once just like Earth at some point in history but for whatever reason was decimated. So far, they have given us numerous theories as to how Mars turned out as dead as it looks today, but they don't know for sure and that's what this Curiosity Rover is supposed to find out, they tell us. The public psyche has been bombarded with this type of message for years now, and has increased ten fold these last few years. It won't take much for this to be believed by the entire world, just a 'find' by NASA will get the ball rolling, as Terence.drew pointed out in the link below.

Quotes from the actual NASA chief of the Curiosity Mars program, and director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory,

professor Charles Elachi:

Charles Elachi, director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said Sunday night's spectacle was a bargain, even at $2.5 billion. "This movie cost you less than 7 bucks per American citizen," he said. Later, John Grotzinger, the mission's project scientist, quipped, "That's a movie I want to see."http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48511087/ns ... CBVd6AmySo

“This [$2.5 billion] 'movie’ cost less than $7 per American citizen and look at the excitement it produced,” he added. “Tomorrow, we are going to start exploring Mars. Next week will bring new discoveries and we continue to explore the solar system and universe, because our curiosity knows no bounds.”http://www.fastcocreate.com/1681410/the ... or-geeks#1

At 0:16:"And then it was just so exciting...it was quite a movie...hahaha!"

In Curiosity’s case, the CPU is a PowerPC 750 (PowerPC G3 in Mac nomenclature) clocked at around 200MHz — which might seem slow, but it’s still hundreds of times faster than, say, the Apollo Guidance Computer used in the first Moon landings. Also on the motherboard are 256MB of DRAM, and 2GB of flash storage — which will be used to store video and scientific data before transmission to Earth. […]

On the software side of things, NASA again stuck to tried-and-tested solutions, opting for the 27-year-old VxWorks operating system. VxWorks, developed by Wind River Systems (which was acquired by Intel), is a real-time operating system used in a huge number of embedded systems. The previous Mars rovers (Sojourner, Spirit, Opportunity), Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, and the SpaceX Dragon spacecraft all use VxWorks. VxWorks also powers BMW iDrive, the Apache Longbow helicopter, and the Apple Airport Extreme and Linksys WRT54G routers (really).
Fascinating, really, that these specs seem so humble — especially storage capacity.

George Noori had Hoagland on C2C the night of the landing along with a few other guests. I only heard part of the show as I fell to sleep but I recall something about the speed at which the Curiosity landing craft would release its parachute. That was said to be above the speed of sound by one of the guests. I guess that's about 700 mph. That seems a bit fast to consider a parachute, doesn't it?

That struck me as odd because of the severe stress on parachute cables at that speed (not to mention the chute). Of course, the atmospheric density would have to be taken into account but this is at least a potential data point we can mine to verify. I've been around steel cables used to dock huge oil barges and heard stories about their snapping, and slicing men in two. How do we find the relevent numbers here and what would they show? I could be wrong about this-- and the air density, the chute and the cable strength can all be proven to handle the momentum of the craft given its velocity. I'd like to see JPL's calculations however, or see someone double check their figures.

In the NASA animation, we see the chute deploy but I grew up watching cartoon physics on The Bugs Bunny Roadrunner Hour and enjoyed the stop-motion / identification of the cayote's biological name. That was instructive edutainment that is missing from the NASA animation. When the chute deploys, NASA JPL should freeze the frame and identify the parameters such as velocity, Mars g, and cable strength. Being a university and high tech lab, one would think they could use that wonderful education cartoon technique. Alternatively, they could release comic books. Todays comic books are beautifully coloured and digitally enhanced with a lot of detail.

Just to give you a better feel for what I'm talking about, I found this 2 minute video showing how a real cable snapped back at 100 mph after failing to arrest a jet landing on an aircraft carrier.

The situation is not precisely comparable but maybe it'll stimulate someone's interest in cables and parachutes here. It's mind boggling to think that JPL/NASA might be hoaxing this Curiosity mission-- the capacity for organized deception and straight-faced lying goes far beyond anything I've ever before considered but the Aurora shooting and then more Apollo analysis here with Simon Shack makes my consideration of this very serious. The lying is so organized, detailed and relentless that I often wonder if demonic forces don't indeed exist, that carry these operations out.

Cool... but I don't know about the last part when he says that anyone not understanding this is "sinful".

I would just say that the people falling for the ridiculous NASA's scams are victims of a century-long "mass hypnosis".

Yeah - I'll quote Wickedpedia...

"Hypnosis is a mental state (according to "state theory") or imaginative role-enactment (according to "non-state theory").It is usually induced by a procedure known as a hypnotic induction, which is commonly composed of a long series of preliminary instructions and suggestions."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnosis

So, basically, we are surrounded by an enormous amount of hypnotized people. This realization should not scare us - on the contrary: it should motivate any sound and balanced individual to do something about it. If you back off from this - on the grounds that you feel too lonely and emarginated - you are a wimp. That's all.

Cool... but I don't know about the last part when he says that anyone not understanding this is "sinful".

I would just say that the people falling for the ridiculous NASA's scams are victims of a century-long "mass hypnosis".

Yeah - I'll quote Wickedpedia...

"Hypnosis is a mental state (according to "state theory") or imaginative role-enactment (according to "non-state theory").It is usually induced by a procedure known as a hypnotic induction, which is commonly composed of a long series of preliminary instructions and suggestions."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnosis

So, basically, we are surrounded by an enormous amount of hypnotized people. This realization should not scare us - on the contrary: it should motivate any sound and balanced individual to do something about it. If you back off from this - on the grounds that you feel too lonely and emarginated - you are a wimp. That's all.

To do exactly what about it? What we've already been doing here? If these people were just hypnotized, then it would be easy for us to help them wake up out of it. The problem is far bigger than just hypnosis, they are brainwashed to the core. The propaganda they have been getting for decades has been crystallised, meaning its not just apart of their subconscious, it is apart of their very being. Look at the reaction from the populace over this Curiosity Rover. For a lot of the people its like its the only thing of import to ever happen in their lives. Suddenly their faith in humanity itself has been renewed, because a piece of tin can landed on some distant piece of rock. Its like a new beginning for them, like some religious conversion taking shape before our eyes. You see what I'm saying? Do you seriously think these people are worth your time? Look at all the dislikes the video I posted got. No amount of evidence will break their conditioning. The amount of celebration that we see from people over this non-event is pathetic. We didn't see this kind of hype when the very first tin can supposedly landed on Mars, so it really makes me wonder whats so special about this one.

What can really frustrate is what I call "delusional regression". You can invest hundreds or thousands of hours de-patterning someone from the Official Propaganda, and at the end of the 'psychotherapy', they themselves are wincing at the lies they once swallowed as truth.

Yet leave them to mong out in front of BBC TV and within a couple of days they're starting to regress to the state of delusion they were in before you dug them out! How can that be?

When it comes to propaganda, is there a point of no return? Is it a case of cumulative lifetime exposure causing irreversible cognitive damage? Who is harder to de-program: an 80 year old man or an 8 year old child? What makes some people more susceptible than others to propaganda? Why are some of us incapable of applying our own critical thinking to a new faked event? Those who accept that the Apollo Missions were fake, for example, should instinctively doubt NASA and its stories about a Mars expedition. Yet for some, the application of critical thinking to a new phony narrative, and healthy cynicism towards it just isn't there. Why not?

Orwell: 1984.. wrote:
In some ways she was far more acute than Winston, and far less susceptible to Party propaganda. Once when he happened in some connexion to mention the war against Eurasia, she startled him by saying casually that in her opinion the war was not happening. The rocket bombs which fell daily on London were probably fired by the Government of Oceania itself, 'just to keep people frightened'. This was an idea that had literally never occurred to him. She also stirred a sort of envy in him by telling him that during the Two Minutes Hate her great difficulty was to avoid bursting out laughing. But she only questioned the teachings of the Party when they in some way touched upon her own life. Often she was ready to accept the official mythology, simply because the difference between truth and falsehood did not seem important to her. She believed, for instance, having learnt it at school, that the Party had invented aeroplanes. (In his own schooldays, Winston remembered, in the late fifties, it was only the helicopter that the Party claimed to have invented; a dozen years later, when Julia was at school, it was already claiming the aeroplane; one generation more, and it would be claiming the steam engine.)

SmokingGunII wrote:
Could one of our learned members please compare the engine power between this & Apollo 11? Just curious.

It seems that if you drop something from space or from an orbit around planet Mars onto the Mars surface, it will arrive at a velocity v of about 5 000 m/s, when hitting ground, mostly due to Mars gravity that is about 3.7 m/s².

It corresponds to a unit kinetic energy (v²/2) of 12.5 MJ/kg.

Mars atmosphere is pretty thin so parachutes will hardly brake anything coming flying in at 5 000 m/s, so what you need is a rocket engine that can apply an opposite force that stops the mass m (kg) coming dropping down, e.g. if the mass is 1 kg of thing being dropped at 5 000 m/s, the rocket engine must apply 12.5 MJ (megajoule) energy to stop it (and the engine itself).

The Mars Science Laboratory spacecraft thus had an entry-descent-landing (EDL) system (2,401 kg + 390 kg of propellant), and a 899 kg (1,980 lb) mobile rover with an integrated instrument package, total weight 3 690 kg.
That weight apparently was approaching Mars at velocity abt. 5 000 m/s due to Mars gravity working on it for a long time and no braking was taking place so the kinetic energy involved was 46.125 GJ (which is quite a lot - 12 812,5 kWh):
When the Mars atmosphere was reached parachutes were deployed to brake the space craft ... at speed 5 000 m/s. The Mars atmosphere is pretty thin and light and will kill you at once if you inhale it; atmospheric pressure on the Mars ground is only 6 hPa compared with a pressure of 1000 hPa on Earth. In spite of this, we are told the parachutes worked and ...
also some EDL rockets were fired at the end.
And then the EDL and mobile rover landed peacefully at 1-2 m/s speed after 7 minutes.

So the average speed in atmosphere was 2 500 m/s during 420 seconds = 1 050 000 m travel in atmosphere. 1050 kilometers!

Last edited by Heiwa on Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.